I learned from Stan, WAS NOT SWORN TO SECRECY. What the hell are you talking about. Have you ever hit a ball with CTE?
CTE experiment, with civil discussion
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
I learned from Stan, WAS NOT SWORN TO SECRECY. What the hell are you talking about. Have you ever hit a ball with CTE?
... as long as that information doesn't involve looking at the pocket before the shot...
Yes.
As described in this thread with a one tip offset for one angle and a 1/2 CB offset for another angle very consistently but the OB doesn't go to the pocket except for those angles and at the same distance from the CB.
Its always a 1/2 ball
If you make claims that people pocket balls above their level, I won't call you a liar. If you make claims that every single pro aims the same way, and they're all in on some secret and don't want the rest of the world to know about it... then yes, I'm calling you a liar. You don't actually believe that, do you?
---
As for a bet, what sort of bet will "prove" claims about CTE? The whole thrust of the arguments against CTE is that there are subconscious adjustments being made. There's no way to "prove" a guy using CTE isn't making subconscious adjustments. If they're truly subconscious, even the SHOOTER doesn't know he's doing it. How is a guy standing 6 feet away gonna know?
Showing me some guy sinking balls will not sell me. But you have a good chance of selling me if you can show it's geometrically sound on paper.
Being diplomatic and being backhanded are not the same thing. He is stating very plainly what he believes: in a nutshell, it doesn't work on paper but can be helpful to some people anyway. But it requires the shooter the shooter to make adjustments. If the shooter follows it rigidly and literally, he's going to miss balls. Dr. Dave didn't come to that conclusion by pure happenstance.
You have to remember, this is a very very old argument. Dave's opinion is based on having seen all the arguments a thousand times. The CTE guys have had at least ten years to sell him on it, to prove it's geometrically correct, to list the exact, concrete steps needed to cut in those three balls, etc. With all the posts he's made on it, you CANNOT accuse him of casually dismissing it.
You don't get to write articles by being a great player. You get to write articles because you know what you're talking about and can communicate it effectively.
So why's he include it on his page if he thinks it's bunk? He has stated before: he believes it can work... just not to the extent people claim and not without subconscious tweaking. Dave honestly feels he understands it, but it just doesn't work as advertised. If you think he's mistaken and doesn't really understand it, correct specific misconceptions on the page. BTW, notice all copy/pasted info south of Stan Shuffett gives other perspectives on CTE besides his own.
Not exactly. Being a reasonably smart guy, I saw ghostball on paper and said "ok, that looks like it makes sense". And then I could easily test it. I could put a second object ball in the ghostball position, smack it, and the ball went in the hole. To this day I can repeat that test with anyone older than, I dunno, 10... and it will also make sense to them.
CTE did not make sense on paper the first time I saw it, and 600 posts later it continues to not make sense on paper, and I have zero simple repeatable test I can take to the pool table to prove it works. That's the key difference.
Additionally, in practice, it has not worked. I'm not looking at it JUST on paper and never tried to hit a ball with it.
Sigh... they all find reasons to back out. I guess it's my bad attitude. It's impossible to win with CTE guys - you chide dr. dave for not making an effort to learn it. Well, I'm making that effort to learn it. I'm expressing doubt and skepticism (based on the fact that it doesn't seem to work on paper), but I'm openminded enough to reserve final judgment until I ACTUALLY TRY IT.
If you don't want to take the 5 or 10 minutes (supposedly all that's needed) to show it to me, then I have no option than to judge it based on what I've seen on paper.
[snipped chris stuff]
First, if it gets your hackles up at being called a liar, don't imply chris is lying. My impression is that chris doesn't make his gambling money by deceiving people. He just matches up. Maybe before his speed became known, he hustled. I don't know.
What I do know is pros have their own aiming methods, they aren't all identical, and you are far too intelligent to play little games where you hint that they may secretly be using CTE and just hiding it from us... when obviously many (I'm gonna say most) of them do not.
FYI, I have also had long phone conversations with Hal, and shorter phone conversations with Stan, Ron, and Spidey. I have literally spent thousands of hours reading about, studying, listening to experts about, trying out, experimenting with, discussing, and debating CTE and similar systems. I have also put a lot of time into creating and constantly improving my CTE resource page. And I have included all of the best information currently available in written form from all of the experts, along with numerous links and references to Spidey's blog, which is often cited by the CTE proponents as the best source for CTE information. It is ridiculous to imply I haven't done my "homework."
Mike Page, Bob Jewett, Colin Colenso, and many other respected posters have also gone through a similar process long before I did, and they also have similar views on CTE and other align-and-pivot aiming systems. As far as I know, most people respect Mike, Bob, and Colin as much as I do for their knowledge, insight, teaching abilities, and level of play. Mike Page has probably studied and thought about this stuff more than anybody else on the planet, and he has spent face-to-face time time with most of the experts. If you don't agree with my views, at least consider what Mike has written. I've quoted one of his recent posts below. Colin has also done a great job summarizing the many benefits systems like CTE provide to players.
Concerning pros using CTE, the only attempt I've ever seen to find out and document how pros aim is written up in this article: How the Pros Aim (by Shari Stauch, Pool & Billards magazine, 1995). If you have seen this article yet, check it out.
Regards,
Dave
Let's make dr_dave's page better. Cite specifically what you think is opinion on dr_dave's page that is taking away from peoples ability to learn CTE.
If you had a long conversation with Hal on the phone and you can't CTE the ball in the hole then you must either be only book smart, or Hal knew right away he didn't like you and so he didn't give you the info you were seeking. Its ridiculous to believe you can't CTE a ball in the hole with what you know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stop misleading people.
Spider already did that, and I dont think much if anything was changed.
I'm probably a little better of a player than you think I am. I hope we can meet each other some day and play some. You bring the cookies, and I'll bring the milk.
You are wrong about me not being able to pocket balls with CTE. I can. I just can't do it by exactly following the procedures that have been offered by Hal, Stan, Spidey, and others. If I don't adjust my initial alignment and/or my pivot based on my "visual intelligence," only some of the balls go in the hole. If I use my judgment, then more of the balls go in the hole.
I have never denied that CTE works. We have had numerous testimonials that it does, and I believe those people. I and others have just been curious to know how and why it works, and I think this has been made fairly clear through this and other threads. Not everybody cares why or how something works, but I and others do.
Regards,
Dave
... not true. I changed the page quite a bit after Spidey's feedback, and I added numerous links and references to his blog. However, I did not do everything he asked. For example, he asked me to delete all of the quotes I have from others. I will not do this because I think the quotes provide useful insight and context. If you haven't read my CTE resource page recently, check it out. It has changed a lot over the last two weeks.
Regards,
Dave
Last edited:
Only dr_dave can speak towards the exact intent of his page but I see absolutely no malicious content on it about CTE. I understand that CTE proponents have a continuous uphill battle with people about a system they believe deeply in. I respect their belief in CTE and their universal respect for Hal Houle. For many who use CTE the system works splendidly.
There is something all the CTE believers must understand. All of dr_dave's content on CTE is 100% correct and is not opinion. This does not take anything away from the system Hal Houle created or your very real success implementing it on the table. Citing the mechanical deficiencies in CTE is only acknowledging the entirety of the facts surrounding the system. In my opinion one of the beautiful things about the concept of CTE is the fact that you subconsciously make the adjustments.
This community has a huge asset in dr_dave. It's hard to find a better person to explain the intricacies in the mechanics of the game better than a mechanical engineering professor who loves the game. It means he has the passion, knowledge and the ability to effectively transfer that knowledge to others. But he can't do it if you're unwilling to learn.
Something people on both sides of the CTE argument need to understand is that both sides can learn from the other.
The CTE believers need to turn into CTE experts. The only way to do that is through the knowledge that is available to you. You need to go from faith in the system to a complete knowledge of the system. Part of this is admitting that CTE won't work without the individual making subconscious (or conscious) adjustments. If you don't believe me then rig up an overhead video camera and watch yourself on different shots. If the framework of CTE is as described then you are subconsciously altering the system. This knowledge will make you a better CTE user, proponent and instructor. Ultimately, more is proven true by skeptics than true believers.
The well intentioned CTE skeptics need the people who successfully implement CTE to further understand the system. It's a credit to Hal Houle that he is able to teach, in a relatively short time frame, something that seemingly cannot be adequately explained by many on a forum. CTE implementation does not come easily.
Both sides need to be cooperative and open if everyone is to benefit.
Last edited:
I'm probably a little better of a player than you think I am. I hope we can meet each other some day and play some. You bring the cookies, and I'll bring the milk.
You are wrong about me not being able to pocket balls with CTE. I can. I just can't do it by exactly following the procedures that have been offered by Hal, Stan, Spidey, and others. If I don't adjust my initial alignment and/or my pivot based on my "visual intelligence," only some of the balls go in the hole. If I use my judgment, then more of the balls go in the hole.
I have never denied that CTE works. We have had numerous testimonials that it does, and I believe those people. I and others have just been curious to know how and why it works, and I think this has been made fairly clear through this and other threads. Not everybody cares why or how something works, but I and others do.
Regards,
Dave
I will gladly bring the cookies. Lets talk basic cte. Hal's basic 10 minute phone instruction. Does it work or not, keep it very simple and basic.
I'm probably a little better of a player than you think I am. I hope we can meet each other some day and play some. You bring the cookies, and I'll bring the milk.
Regards,
Dave
U give URself too much credit :thumbup:
Actually, Spidey's blog has proven nothing at all. It's just more of his Elmer Gantryesque sales pitch. Spidey seems to love playing I'VE GOT A SECRET.
And yes, I've "tried" CTE; several times as a matter of fact. Sadly, because of the ways it's thus far been described by its worshipers, that's about all any person can do; they must try and try until they finally discover its essence. And that's what I did all afternoon today; I worked with CTE until I felt like I was sighting, re-sighting, parallel shifting, and air pivoting with ease. And after all that, I had to admit: the system does have some merit.
But then I got down and really studied the method to see what was going on with it. What I discovered was that, on every shot, I was ultimately bringing my cue back on the same line that it always has to be on to pocket the ball by any and every other system. The geometrical and physical requirements hadn't changed a bit. Now I know to my own satisfaction that CTE is just another way of meeting those unchangeable requirements. It cannot, and will not, revolutionize the game.
I also had the great pleasure of running into Jerry Briesath today. He opportunely came into the pool room while I was working with CTE. So I asked Jerry what he thought about the "CTE aiming method," ( I figured if every pro uses this system, Jerry would know and tell me so). Surprisingly, Jerry said he didn't even know what I was talking about. I then explained where CTE came from and how it works. Jerry seemed to be amused, but he was very diplomatic in his assessment. Want to know what he said? Call me and I'll explain it to you over the phone. :smile:
Roger<----Now knows all he needs to know about CTE! :thumbup:
Good News - A video will be coming out from a respected Instructor that should put this dog and pony show to rest.
Stan Shuffett will be releasing a video for sale later this year that teaches his CTE based Pro One aiming system and an explanation of the original CTE method.
I, for one am looking forward to it.
See thread below:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=185620
Thanks, Dr Dave - I can't help but think that your quest for knowledge might have prodded things along.
Stan Shuffett will be releasing a video for sale later this year that teaches his CTE based Pro One aiming system and an explanation of the original CTE method.
I, for one am looking forward to it.
See thread below:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=185620
Thanks, Dr Dave - I can't help but think that your quest for knowledge might have prodded things along.